An application for a mining lease requires prior approval from the Central Government, and those received before the Amendment Act of 2015 become ineligible, except when restored under certain provisions.

JUDGMENT :

DHIRAJ SINGH THAKUR, CJ

The present writ appeals have been preferred against the judgment and order, dated 01.09.2015, in W.P. No.18035 of 2015.

With a view to understand the background in the context of which the present controversy has arisen, it is necessary to give in brief the material facts as under:

An application came to be filed by the writ petitioner on 07.03.2005 for grant of mining lease for iron ore in respect of area measuring Ac.110 in Sy. Nos.725, 822 and 846 of Uyyalawada Village in Kurnool District. The application was processed by the officers of the Mines and Geology Department and a report prepared was forwarded to the State Government through the office of the Director of Mines and Geology on 08.03.2007 with a recommendation for grant of the mining rights.

2. The State Government took a decision to grant mining lease in favour of the writ petitioner for a period of twenty years subject to the approval of the Government of India, which was otherwise necessary under Section 5(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957. A communication, dated 28.09.2007, was addressed to the Central Government to convey its approval.

The Central Government, upon receipt of the communication from the State Government, sought certain reports and clarifications vide their communication, dated 11.02.2013 and 05.05.2014, which are stated to have been so furnished by the State Government. This was later on followed by another communication, dated 29.09.2014, from the Union of India whereby certain additional information was sought from the State Government.

3. Finally, failure to elicit a response from the Central Government forced the petitioner to submit a representation, dated 08.02.2015, to the Union of India for grant of approval as had been sought by the State Government. This was responded to by the Union of India vide their communication, dated 23.04.2015, addressed to the State Government to the effect that “the proposal for accord or prior approval for grant of mineral concession” had become ineligible as per the provisions of Section 10A(1) of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015.

4. The State Government, however, was advised to ascertain whether the proposal for grant of mineral concession was saved from ineligibility under the provisions of Section 10A of the Amendment Act and further that if the proposal remained eligible, the State Government would bring it to the notice of the Ministry so that necessary action as per the provision of the Amendment Act could be taken.

5. At this stage, it would be relevant to refer to section 10A(1) & (2) of the Amendment Act of 2015, which is relevant for purposes of the present controversy. The provision reads thus:

“10A. (1) All applications received prior to the date of commencement of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015, shall become ineligible.

(2) Without prejudice to sub-section (1), the following shall remain eligible on and from the date of commencement of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015:—

(a) applications received under section 11A of this Act;

(b) where before the commencement of the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Act, 2015 a reconnaissance permit or prospecting licence has been granted in respect of any land for any mineral, the permit holder or the licensee shall have a right for obtaining a prospecting licence followed by a mining lease, or a mining lease, as the case may be, in respect of that mineral in that land, if the State Government is satisfied that the permit holder or the lic